RYA ZOBEL, District Judge
On March 7, 2005, this Court allowed a motion to dismiss by defendants Michael Bellotti, Denise Burke, Susan Clark, Patricia Hayes, Debra Henderson, Peter Perroncello, Anne Walsh, Alice Weber and Debbie Williams. Judgment entered on March 8, 2005. On March 21, 2005, plaintiff moved for reconsideration and, before the court ruled on that motion, plaintiff, on April 6, 2005, filed a notice of appeal. Because the notice of appeal does not become effective until this court disposes of the motion for reconsideration, the Court of Appeals returned the matter for a ruling on that motion.
The motion focuses on delays in filing the opposition to the motion to dismiss which, plaintiff explains, were occasioned by an array of procedural and practical road blocks resulting from institutional rules and processes "designed for failure." (Plaintiff's motion at 1). The issue decisive of the motion, however, was not the late filing of plaintiff's opposition; it was the late filing of the petition. The motion for reconsideration gives no reason why the statute of limitations does not bar this petition.
Plaintiff also points out that the motion to dismiss did not include defendant, Dr. Patricia Prickett. Plaintiff is correct, but the return of service does not reflect proper service in accordance with Rule 4, Fed.R.Civ.P., on this defendant.
The motion for reconsideration is denied.